Open AccessDiagnostic accuracy of resting systolic toe pressure for diagnosis of peripheral arterial disease in people with and without diabetes: a cross‐sectional retrospective case‐control study
Author(s) -
Tehan Peta Ellen,
Barwick Alex Louise,
Sebastian Mathew,
Chuter Vivienne Helaine
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
journal of foot and ankle research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.763
H-Index - 39
ISSN - 1757-1146
DOI - 10.1186/s13047-017-0236-z
Subject(s) - medicine , diabetes mellitus , peripheral , blood pressure , cross sectional study , arterial disease , disease , cardiology , rehabilitation , retrospective cohort study , vascular disease , physical therapy , pathology , endocrinology
Background The resting systolic toe pressure (TP) is a measure of small arterial function in the periphery. TP is used in addition to the ankle‐brachial index when screening for peripheral arterial disease (PAD) of the lower limb in those with diabetes, particularly in the presence of lower limb medial arterial calcification. It may be used as an adjunct assessment of lower limb vascular function and as a predictor of wound healing. The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of TP for detecting PAD in people with and without diabetes. Methods This was a retrospective case‐control study. Two researchers extracted information from consecutive patient records, including TP measurements, colour Duplex ultrasound results, demographic information, and medical history. Measures of diagnostic accuracy were determined by receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis, and calculation of sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios. Results Three hundred and nintey‐four participants with suspected PAD were included. In the diabetes group ( n = 176), ROC analysis of TP for detecting PAD was 0.78 (95%CI: 0.69 to 0.84). In the control group ( n = 218), the ROC of TP was 0.73 (95%CI: 0.70 to 0.80). TP had highest sensitivity when anatomical distribution of disease was both proximal and distal (diabetes group: 79.49%, the control group: 82.61%). TP yielded highest sensitivity in mild disease (50–75% stenosis) in diabetes group, (81.82%) and moderate disease (>75% stenosis) in control group (80.77%). Conclusions Our findings indicate that TPs are useful to assist in diagnosing PAD in clinical practice, however, results should be interpreted with caution due to the small probability of PAD being present with a negative test.